Australia would do well to open its doors to victims of persecution in Islamic countries. In contrast with the various problems caused by Muslim immigrants and their support for the Qur’an which condones abuse of women, children and mandates discrimination towards non-Muslims, the Christian and Jewish victims of Islamic imperialism have settled in to their new countries. They do not create such a fuss. How often do you see headlines such as ‘Assyrian Christian bishops call women cats’/dogs’ meat’ or ‘Police form Jewish crime Squad’ or ‘Buddhists shoot at police station in drive-by shooting’? The reality is, and everyone knows it deep down, that those sympathetic to Judeo-Christian and other non-Muslim values tend to settle much more peaceably into their new countries, than the Al Hilalis and Hizb-ut Tahrirs of the world. The latter come with the loaded gun of their negative perception of western civilization. They come with the attitude, that eventually the place must convert to their ways. If a Jew, Christian, Buddhist or secular humanist wishes to change their beliefs, no-one will threaten to execute them, as will certain Muslims especially Hizb-ut Tahrir as they clearly stated in black and white in their Australian Constitution. Why I say ‘certain Muslims’ is that I believe that some do respond the ‘natural law’ in their hearts and can see that such execution is wrong. However, they are cowed into silence by the powerful members of their community and will hardly ever condemn them.

Some countries are waking up as to who the real victims are with regard to Islam.

Some countries are waking up as to who the real victims are with regard to Islam.

Germany may open its doors to Iraqi Christians fleeing from persecution by Muslim extremists if the countries of the European Union vote to refuse to do so. Germany’s Commissioner for Immigration Affairs, Maria Boehmer, told the website ankawa.com that “members of the Christian minority are regularly threatened by Muslim gangs and heads of families are forced to convert to Islam or leave the country in 24 hours.” (source)

And some like lawyer Robert DeKelaita in the United States, devote their time to helping Iraqi Christians escape Muslim persecution. (reference)

And if anyone doubts there is a crisis in Christians being abused and attacked by Muslims in our era read this (LINK)

And the words of Louis Sako, the Chaldean archbishop of Kirkuk who is pleading for help for the Christians to remain in Iraq and not increasingly become refugees.

“Do not leave us alone. Do not leave us isolated and abandoned”…”There are 100,000 refugees in Syria”, the archbishop said, “30,000 in Jordan, many thousands in Lebanon, Egypt, and Turkey. They know that their situation is temporary, and the prospect of returning home seems like a dream.” (source)

Australian Assyrians

Whether our assistance takes the form of helping the Christians in Iraq, or assisting them, the Jews, Buddhists or Hindus, to settle in our country – our moral duty is to assist these victims of Islamic imperialism and oppression, wherever they may be in the world.

In a story Wednesday on a jihadist attack on a wedding party and other jihad activity in Thailand, Agence France Presse added a concluding paragraph that was typical of mainstream media coverage of the Thai jihad and of jihad activity in general. For while AP, Reuters, AFP and the rest never saw a piece of Palestinian propaganda they didn’t like, they also never saw a jihad they couldn’t whitewash.

AFP’s concluding paragraph blandly placed all the blame for the conflict on the non-Muslim Thai government:

More than 3,000 people have been killed since separatist unrest broke out in January 2004 in the south, which was an autonomous Malay Muslim sultanate until mainly Buddhist Thailand annexed it in 1902, provoking decades of tension.

All was well, you see, until the Buddhists of Thailand, motivated apparently only by rapacious imperialism, annexed the poor autonomous Malay Muslim Sultanate. AFP does not mention, of course, that the Malay Sultanate at that time was making war against the Siamese during the war between Siam and Burma, and Thailand conquered it in that context — making it Thai by a right of conquest that has been universally recognized throughout human history (except, of course, when it comes to Israel and to any Muslim land that is conquered by non-Muslims).

Along with this come the media’s allergy to the word “jihad,” and its frequent recourse to the passive voice when discussing what the jihadists did. Sometimes inanimate objects act, apparently of their own accord. For example, in a March story on bombings in southern Thailand, Reuters’ lead paragraph stated: “Bombs killed three men and wounded 21 people in three separate attacks in Thailand’s troubled Muslim far south, police said on Sunday.” Reuters gives no hint as to who is doing the bombing and who are the victims – which in itself is a clear indication that the bombers are not the government or pro-government vigilantes, but jihadists.

The story continues in this vein. Its second paragraph tells us that a bomb was hidden in the car, but with no hint as to by whom. In paragraph 5 we learn that in the three southern provinces, “2,500 people have been killed in gun and bomb attacks since a separatist insurgency erupted in January 2004.” The separatist insurgency just erupted, you see, like a volcano. It was an act of God, a force of nature. Here again Reuters gives the reader no hint as to who the separatist insurgents are, or who killed the overwhelming majority of those 2,500 people. In paragraph 6, we learn how the “suspected militants” set off another bomb, but once again are given no hint as to who these militants are.

Same thing in paragraph 7: unidentified “insurgents” ambush the security forces. In paragraph 8, it’s simply a “bomb,” a random, accidental object, that unaccountably wounded four people. But also in that paragraph we learn that this is all taking place in “the three far south provinces which formed an independent sultanate until annexed by Thailand a century ago.” Reuters and AFP are in step on this: the only background they give suggests that Thailand is entirely responsible for provoking the conflict, and should simply have left the Malay Muslims alone.

Only in paragraph 10 of the Reuters story are we finally told that “Buddhist monks” are among the chief targets of the still-unidentified “militants” — which should lead the informed reader to identify them as Islamic jihadists and Sharia supremacists. But they come to that identification with no help from Reuters.

In reality, the Thai jihadists are uniquely brutal even by the standards of their jihadist brethren, and are fighting to correct the outrage, as they see it, of non-Muslim rule over a Muslim population in southern Thailand. But the AFP and Reuters stories exemplify the kind of coverage that jihad activity receives from the mainstream media as a matter of course. The perpetrators of jihad violence are not identified, their ideology is never discussed, and the conflicts they provoke are blamed on their victims. This kind of coverage is of a piece with the U.S. government’s new see-no-jihad, speak-no-jihad, hear-no-jihad policy: both appear to be based on wishful thinking. Both seem to emanate from the idea that if we simply do not allow ourselves to notice jihad activity, it will somehow fade away from neglect. If we pretend that Islam is peaceful, violent Muslims will lay down their arms.